House panel backs school lunch waivers

It was the first lady vs. the “lunch ladies” at the House Appropriations Committee on Thursday morning as Republicans pushed ahead with their plan offering school districts a one-year waiver to opt out of improved nutrition standards promoted by Michelle Obama.

The action came as the panel approved a $142.5 billion farm and food safety budget for the coming year, including $20.9 billion in new discretionary appropriations for the operations of the Agriculture Department and Food and Drug Administration.

Text Size

-

+

reset

From vending machine junk food labels to the merits of fresh white potatoes in the diet of low-income mothers and their young children, nutrition items dominated the meeting. But the school meals fight drew the most attention, given the first lady’s prominence, and the key 29-22 committee vote followed a spirited debate that approached two hours.

Given the party breakdown, the outcome was never in doubt. But Democrats did win a pledge from Rep. Robert Aderholt (R-Ala.), the bill’s manager, that he doesn’t intend for the waiver to become permanent law and will consider revisions to make that clearer.

“It’s not permanent, we’re not changing the standards; I do think that Mrs. Obama is well-intentioned, and I don’t mean to be disrespectful to her program,” Aderholt said. “I’m not sure she recognizes the fuller impact in greater America.”

Aderholt has had the backing of the School Nutrition Association, a powerful trade group that brings with it the mantle of the school nutrition workers — the “lunch ladies” so often invoked in the debate. And Republicans argued that the waiver was no worse than the administrative delays and exemptions President Barack Obama has used in implementing his signature Affordable Care Act.

“I can only stress that it only applies to schools only if they need more time,” Aderholt said “This does not roll back current law.”

SNA took the same approach in its comments after the vote.

“We appreciate the House Appropriations Committee’s support for this waiver to give temporary needed relief to some schools across the country,” said the group’s president, Leah Schmidt. “This will not halt the progress in school cafeterias; it is a temporary reprieve to allow schools to catch up.”

In response the committee action on school meals and white potatoes, White House press secretary Jay Carney said it was a mistake to make decisions based on “politicians instead of pediatricians.”

“As the First Lady said on Tuesday, the last thing that we can afford to do right now is play politics with our kids’ health, especially when we’re finally starting to see some progress on this issue,” Carney said. “Now is not the time to roll back everything that we have worked for. Our kids deserve much better than that.”

But the nutrition standards — which fulfill a 2010 mandate by Congress to promote the consumption of more whole grains products, fruit and vegetables — are already in place for many school lunch programs. Democrats agreed there might be some merit to delay the expansion of the rules next to school breakfasts. But the fear — shared by the first lady in public remarks and a published op-ed piece this week — is that the language amounts to a real step back, not just a pause going forward.

As now drafted, Aderholt’s bill requires a school district to show only that it has operated at a loss for six months in trying to meet the standards. “If I were a school district and I wanted to find a way to save money and not comply, you could drive a food truck through this amendment,” said Rep. Betty McCollum (D-Minn.). And Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) warned that proponents were ignoring the larger health crisis facing the nation.

“The language in the underlying bill is masking the fact that there are many, many school district leaders who seem to not care about what we put in our children’s bodies,” Wasserman Schultz said. “And that is something that we all have to come to grips with in facing the reality that we do have a massively obese country.”

“I am someone who used to eat peanut M&M’s and drink a Coke for breakfast,” she admitted. “Then I got breast cancer at 41 years old. … I don’t blame that, but it does make you more conscious about what you put in your body.”

Aderholt became more defensive as the debate wore on. “This is where the heavy hand of the government is coming down and trying to dictate to local school systems everything about even putting salt shakers on the table,” he said at one point. But after a private exchange with Wasserman Schultz, he went to some pains to say that he doesn’t intend for the waiver to become permanent.

In the case of white potatoes, Democrats opted later not to insist on a roll call vote. And as it goes next to the House floor, the bill will carry with it language that opens the door for fresh potatoes — not chips or fries — to qualify for purchases under the supplemental nutrition program for women, infants and young children, best known as WIC.

There, too, the first lady has protested, saying Congress should respect the recommendations of the Institute of Medicine. But her best hope is that she can hold onto a compromise brokered last week in the Senate Appropriations Committee.

That agreement also allows potatoes into WIC — a big marketing victory for the industry. But it also spells out a process by which the administration can pull potatoes back out after a mandated review of the entire WIC vegetable selection.